Crim Flashcards
learn it
General Reqs for Conspiracy
-Intentional agreement between two or more persons;
-specific attempt to commit an unlawful act or a lawful act by unlawful means; and
-An overt act in furtherance of the unlawful act (only required for half the states and the MPC)
Unilateral Theory of Conspiracy
MPC/Majority - Only one person needs to specifically intend to enter the agreement
Minority/Common Law - Bilateral
Two or more ppl gotta specifically intent to enter agreement
Overt act
Warrantless search
Theft Crime: Forgery
Forgery is the:
i) Making;
ii) Of a false writing;
iii) With apparent legal significance; and
iv) With the intent to defraud (i.e., make wrongful use of the forged document).
Making includes creating, altering, or fraudulently inducing another to sign a document when that person is unaware of the significance of the document.
Specific Intent Crimes
FIAT
First Degree Murder
Inchoate Offenses
Assault with Intent to Commit Battery
Theft Offenses
General Intent crime
General-intent crimes (e.g., battery, rape, kidnapping, and false imprisonment)
* Require the intent to perform an unlawful act
* Intent—purposely, knowingly, recklessly, or negligently
Ineffective Assistance of Counsel
In order to reverse a conviction on the grounds of ineffective assistance of counsel, the defendant must prove both
- there was actual prejudice to the D
- counsel fell below OBJECTIVE standard
Withdrawal as a defense to conspiracy
At CL - Withdrawal is not a defense (and overt act not required)
Federal/majority rule—withdrawal is possible after the agreement and BUT BEFORE the
commission of an overt act, but D must give notice to co-conspirators or give timely
notice to police - b/c the conspiracy does not exist untl the over act is committed
Under the MPC and the minority view - subsequent withdrawal is possible only if the defendant acts voluntarily to “thwart the success” of the conspiracy.
Conspiracy at Common Law
- An agreement;
- Between two or more persons (bilateral conspiracy);
- To accomplish an unlawful purpose;
- With the intent to accomplish that purpose.
A contrast b/w conspiracy and the substantial step required for attempt
Contrast attempt: To constitute attempt, the defendant must have taken a substantial step toward commission of the crime. A mere preparatory act is insufficient for attempt.
Conspiracy Majority
- An agreement;
- Between at least one person (unilateral when only one party actually agrees majority and
MPC; not recognized under common or federal law) - To accomplish an unlawful purpose;
- With the intent to accomplish that purpose.
- Overt Act
Scope of Conspiracy
A conspirator is liable for conspiracy and the co-conspirators’ substantive crimes
committed in furtherance of the conspiracy (Pinkerton Rule).
*Under the MPC, the minority view, a member of the conspiracy is not criminally liable for such crimes unless that member aids and abets in the commission of the crime
Does conspiracy merge?
NO -It is a separate crime
Can D escape liability for underlying/substantive crimes even if they are guilty of conspiracy?
Liability for substantive crimes—for this purpose, D may withdraw by giving notice to
his co-conspirators or timely advising legal authorities of the existence of the
conspiracy even though such an action does not thwart the conspiracy
Intent Required for Conspiracy
Conspiracy is a specific-intent crime. A conspirator must have the intent to agree and the intent to commit the criminal objective. The intent to agree may be inferred from the conduct of the parties.
That is, even if the UNDERLYING crime is not specific intent…the conspiracy crime is
Derivative Use Immunity
Derivative-use immunity protects a witness from the use of the witness’s own testimony, or any evidence derived from that testimony, against the witness in a subsequent prosecution.
ONLY precludes the prosecution from using the witness’s own testimony, or any evidence derived from the testimony, against the witness does not necessarily preclude later prosecution against them bvased on other evidence.
But does not protect him from its use in a civil suit.
Transactional Immunity
Transactional—blanket or total immunity, fully protects a witness from future
prosecution for crimes RELATED to testimony
Immunity
The prosecution may compel incriminating testimony (at trial or before a grand jury) if it grants immunity to the individual and the individual must testify. The testimony cannot be used against the individual, directly or indirectly, in a subsequent prosecution.
BUT CAN in CIVIL ACTION!!!
Testimony made under grant of immunity….
Testimony under a grant of immunity may not be used by another U.S. jurisdiction to prosecute the defendant.
Thus, a state grant of immunity will preclude admission of the testimony in a federal proceeding
Peremptory Challenges
A prosecutor is free to exercise peremptory challenges in any manner he sees fit unless such exercise violates the Equal Protection Clause. The Equal Protection Clause prevents the use of peremptory challenges for racially or gender motivated reasons. Since the prosecutor did not use peremptory challenges for either of these reasons, the judge should overrule the defendant’s objection.
Malice Crimes
Common Law Murder and Arson
What does malice mean?
-Reckless disregard of a high risk of harm
* Does not require D to act with ill will toward victim